On Thursday 17 June 2004 09:12, Leif Mortenson wrote: Mauro already answered the 'build concern'. Quick note, I was very concerned that avalon-excalibur didn't build in its entirety, and not from a single point of build invocation. Hence the big effort in a package that I personally have no investment in. "xml-util" remained a problem. The JVM crashes on my machine, and the closest I got to a conclusion was classloading (XML apis) in conjunction with testcase (IIRC). It is probably still in a non-fully-buildable state.
> Also it looks like the pool and thread packages have been broken up into > instrumented and uninstrumented copies of the components. Is this really > necessary? There were a lot of mess in Excalibur, prior to my and Stephen's fairly large clean-up somewhere around March IIRC... 1. There was a few cyclic dependencies, and one rather 'long chain' involving the instrumented packages. 2. instrument itself have (had?) a dependency on Alt-RMI, which sits in a semi-limbo/beta/half-dead state in the incubator. It was concluded that such dependency was not entirely healthy. > I fear that the two will quickly diverge and become a maintenance > nightmare. I agree with the sentiment of this conclusion. However, without the proper help to resolve the cyclic dependencies, as well as the 'un-healthy' dependency on Alt-RMI, I did what I could... > This is akin to creating > a version of the classes which do not do logging... Thoughts? I think better SoC principles can be applied and everything goes away. 1. The components and parts are instrumented. 2. The instrument package have a proper SPI/connection interface. 3. Alt-RMI connectivity is a SPI implmentation. Cheers Niclas -- +------//-------------------+ / http://www.bali.ac / / http://niclas.hedhman.org / +------//-------------------+ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Apache Excalibur Project -- URL: http://excalibur.apache.org/
